Methodology Conditions for the formation of massive seed black holes - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Methodology

Conditions for the formation of massive seed black holes

• 1. Major merger (1:3) of gas-rich late-type galaxies (B/T < 0.2)
• 2. Host halo Mh > 1011MSun
• 3. No a pre-existing black hole of MBH > 106 MSun

Friday, August 17, 12

Evolution of the gas component in major merger of disk

Friday, August 17, 12

Multi-scale galaxy merger simulations

from ~100 kpc to 0.1 pc

• Using Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics (SPH code GASOLINE) + splitting of gas particles (Kitsionas & Withworth 2002, Bromm

2004) to increase mass and spatial resolution as galaxy merger proceeds

• Max. Resolution 3000 solar masses and 0.1 pc
• Effective equation of state (EOS) - ideal gas, P = (γ−1) ρ ε, varying effective “γ“ - to model local balance between heating and cooling

in nuclear region (based on Spaans & Silk 2000;2005 – steady-state interstellar gas model heated by starburst w/ radiative transfer)

200 kpc 60 kpc

Mayer et al. 2007, 2008, 2010

EOS stiff (=medium highly pressurized) in the regime of average nuclear disk densities (104-105cm-3) due primarily to irradiation by dust grains heated by stellar UV (SFR >~ 30 Mo/yr)

Friday, August 17, 12

Multi-scale galaxy merger simulations

from ~100 kpc to 0.1 pc

• Using Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics (SPH code GASOLINE) + splitting of gas particles (Kitsionas & Withworth 2002, Bromm

2004) to increase mass and spatial resolution as galaxy merger proceeds

• Max. Resolution 3000 solar masses and 0.1 pc
• Effective equation of state (EOS) - ideal gas, P = (γ−1) ρ ε, varying effective “γ“ - to model local balance between heating and cooling

in nuclear region (based on Spaans & Silk 2000;2005 – steady-state interstellar gas model heated by starburst w/ radiative transfer)

200 kpc 60 kpc

Mayer et al. 2007, 2008, 2010

EOS stiff (=medium highly pressurized) in the regime of average nuclear disk densities (104-105cm-3) due primarily to irradiation by dust grains heated by stellar UV (SFR >~ 30 Mo/yr)

Stiff EOS due to “thermostat” of SF

Friday, August 17, 12

SELF-GRAVITATING GAS DISKS: STABILITY and INFLOWS

THREE REGIMES: Toomre parameter Q = κvs/πGΣ Q < 1 locally unstable to collapse - fragmentation on

(from linear local dynamical timescale (tdyn) - gas clumps make stars perturbative analysis

• f self-gravitating

rotating fluid in infinitesimally thin disk) 1 < Q < 2 locally stable, globally unstable to non-axisymmetric modes (spiral modes, bar modes)

• - angular momentum transport (on a few tdyn)

via spiral density waves (Lynden Bell & Pringle 1979; Lin & Pringle 1987; Laughlin & Adams 2000)

• - gas inflow towards state of minimum energy

Q > 2 locally and globally stable - dynamically uninteresting

• Sweet spot (1<Q<2): a non-fragmenting globally unstable disk to sustain central

gas inflow

• The dissipation rate in the system is crucial – if cooling efficient amplitude of

non-axisymmetric modes increases - inflow increases but Q <~ 1 approached (Tcool < Tdyn drives Q below 1, while with Tcool > Tdyn self-regulation to Q >~1)

Friday, August 17, 12

SELF-GRAVITATING GAS DISKS: STABILITY and INFLOWS

THREE REGIMES: Toomre parameter Q = κvs/πGΣ Q < 1 locally unstable to collapse - fragmentation on

(from linear local dynamical timescale (tdyn) - gas clumps make stars perturbative analysis

• f self-gravitating

rotating fluid in infinitesimally thin disk) 1 < Q < 2 locally stable, globally unstable to non-axisymmetric modes (spiral modes, bar modes)

• - angular momentum transport (on a few tdyn)

via spiral density waves (Lynden Bell & Pringle 1979; Lin & Pringle 1987; Laughlin & Adams 2000)

• - gas inflow towards state of minimum energy

Q > 2 locally and globally stable - dynamically uninteresting

• Sweet spot (1<Q<2): a non-fragmenting globally unstable disk to sustain central

gas inflow

• The dissipation rate in the system is crucial – if cooling efficient amplitude of

non-axisymmetric modes increases - inflow increases but Q <~ 1 approached (Tcool < Tdyn drives Q below 1, while with Tcool > Tdyn self-regulation to Q >~1) 1 < Q < 2 Q<1

Review Volonteri 2010

Friday, August 17, 12

SELF-GRAVITATING GAS DISKS: STABILITY and INFLOWS

THREE REGIMES: Toomre parameter Q = κvs/πGΣ Q < 1 locally unstable to collapse - fragmentation on

(from linear local dynamical timescale (tdyn) - gas clumps make stars perturbative analysis

• f self-gravitating

rotating fluid in infinitesimally thin disk) 1 < Q < 2 locally stable, globally unstable to non-axisymmetric modes (spiral modes, bar modes)

• - angular momentum transport (on a few tdyn)

via spiral density waves (Lynden Bell & Pringle 1979; Lin & Pringle 1987; Laughlin & Adams 2000)

• - gas inflow towards state of minimum energy

Q > 2 locally and globally stable - dynamically uninteresting

• Sweet spot (1<Q<2): a non-fragmenting globally unstable disk to sustain central

gas inflow

• The dissipation rate in the system is crucial – if cooling efficient amplitude of

non-axisymmetric modes increases - inflow increases but Q <~ 1 approached (Tcool < Tdyn drives Q below 1, while with Tcool > Tdyn self-regulation to Q >~1)

Evolution of disk gas surface density profile (1 < Q < 2) regime

T=0 t= a few tdyn

Friday, August 17, 12

INFLOW BOTTLENECK: COOLING AND FRAGMENTATION

In system that cools rapidly (tcool < tdyn) and accumulates gas via inflow eventually Q drops to < 1 and fragmentation/star formation takes over

CONVENTIONAL WAY-OUT: SUPPRESS FRAGMENTATION BY SUPPRESSING COOLING (keep T > 104 K) -NEED METAL-FREE GAS + H2 dissociation by Lyman-Werner UV bg above mean cosmic value at z > 2 BUT METAL-FREE GAS UNREALISTIC CONDITION! (a) Metallicity > 10--5 solar reached at z > 10 - sufficient to trigger rapid cooling esp. in presence of dust (Omukai et

• al. 2008).

(b)Weak inflow rates <1 Mo/yr (Wise et al. 2008; Regan & Haenhelt 2009,2010) Not enough to assemble supermassive clouds/SMS Indeed no self-gravitating compact object forms

Metal-free protogalaxy simulation Regan & Haenhelt 2009

Friday, August 17, 12

Formation of supermassive black holes by direct gas collapse in galaxy mergers

Lucio Mayer

University of Zurich

Collaborators: Stelios Kazantzidis (CCAPP Ohio State Univ.) Simone Callegari (Univ. of Zurich) Andres Escala (KIPAC Stanford/UChile) Silvia Bonoli (Univ. Zurich)

Friday, August 17, 12

Direct gas collapse model: brief intro

Rapid formation of massive BH seed --- mass MBH ~ 105 – 109 Mo

If happens early (z >~ 8-10) can explain high-z QSOs (MBH > 109 Mo) without requiring the continuous Eddington accretion needed for <~100 Mo Pop III (Volonteri & Rees 2006) Simulations show Pop III seeds accrete well below Eddington, eg Johnson & Bromm 2006; Wise et al 2008; Milosavljevic et al. 2010) due low density gas plus their own radiative feedback I - Gas inflow in galaxy from kpc to << 1 pc scales to form supermassive gas cloud (M> 106 Mo) - need efficient loss of angular momentum in galactic disk gas across many spatial scales (eg Lodato & Natarayan 2006) II - Depending on mass and internal rotation of supercloud (T/W) two pathways: (a) supermassive cloud collapses dynamically and globally into massive black hole with MBH ~ Mcloud due to radial GR radial instability (Fowler & Hoyle 1966; Zeldovitch & Novikov 1972; Baumgart & Shapiro 1999; Shibata & Shapiro 2002; Saijo & Hawke 2009) ---> direct formation of SMBH (b) forms a short-lived ( >~ Myr) supermassive star collapsing into BH at the center due to catastrophic neutrino cooling (Begelman et al. 2006; Begelman 2008; Begelman & Volonteri 2010). Even if BH initially only 10-100 Mo it accretes super-Eddington from a pressure-supported convective envelope powered by BH accretion energy (“Quasi-star”) reaching > 104-5 Mo before cloud dispersal in a few Myr ---> formation of massive BH seed

This talk: how can step (I) be achieved?

Friday, August 17, 12

TIMESCALE FOR SUPERMASSIVE CLOUD ASSEMBLY:

REQUIRED GAS INFLOW RATE

SImple argument: a supermassive star (Mstar >~ 106 Mo) has short lifetime (tlife ~ 106 yr) must be assembled on tform < tlife

• --- Characteristic gas inflow rate to feed the cloud dMg/dt > Mstar/tlife > 1 Mo/yr for Mstar >~

106 Mo (Begelman 2008)

Friday, August 17, 12

HOW DO WE GET SUCH HIGH GAS INFLOW RATES AT < pc scales?

TIMESCALE FOR SUPERMASSIVE CLOUD ASSEMBLY:

REQUIRED GAS INFLOW RATE

SImple argument: a supermassive star (Mstar >~ 106 Mo) has short lifetime (tlife ~ 106 yr) must be assembled on tform < tlife

• --- Characteristic gas inflow rate to feed the cloud dMg/dt > Mstar/tlife > 1 Mo/yr for Mstar >~

106 Mo (Begelman 2008)

Friday, August 17, 12

• --->Gravitational torques in self-gravitating, marginally unstable protogalactic disk

(bars-in-bars, spiral modes, see eg Begelman et al. 2006, Lodato & Natarayan 2006; Levine et al. 2009)

Needs massive but “warm” disk (Toomre Q ~ 1.5-2)

How do we keep the disk “warm” and stable?

Standard way: suppress molecular cooling and metal cooling below 104 K to keep Q > 1, avoiding fragmentation and star formation (otherwise gas makes stars rather than BH seed --- star formation bottleneck)

• - potentially can work at very high redshift (z > 15) with very low metallcity

gas, perhaps requires proximity with massive star forming galaxies shining with high LW flux dissociating H2 (Dijikstra et al. 2009; Agarwal et al. 2012)

• - characteristic host protogalaxy mass small (~ < 108 Mo), a potential

problem since inflow rate dMgas/dt ~ Vhalo3/G ~ Mhalo/G <~ 1 Mo/yr neglecting residual angular momentum (roughly consistent with simulations of Wise et al. 2008, Regan & Haenhelt 2009)

Q ~ 1.5 Q ~ 1

Friday, August 17, 12

TOWARDS NEW BH FORMATION SCENARIO:

MASSIVE MULTI-SCALE GAS INFLOWS IN GALAXY MERGERS

• Galaxy mergers are known to trigger the strongest gas inflows in galaxies at

100 pc- 1 kpc scales (due to tidal torques and shocks extracting angular momentum)

• ---> simulations show dM/dt > 100 Mo/yr (eg Kazantzidis et al. 2005; Li et al. 2006),

can sustain high SF rates in ULIRGs and sub-mm galaxies (eg Hopkins et al. 2008) In mergers gas inflows effective, still most of the gas does not turn into stars! from observations SF rate ~ εsf Mgas/tdyn,, εSF = 0.01-0.1, highest efficiencies occurring in high z merging systems (see eg Genzel et al. 2010, Tacconi et al. 2012)

•  slow gas consumption timescale compared to inflow timescale

tdyn/εSF >> tdyn ~ tinflow

Friday, August 17, 12

Bottom line: in mergers there is no “star formation bottleneck”, at least down to 100 pc scales, and there is a lot of low angular momentum gas...

Friday, August 17, 12

Can the merger-driven inflow continue all the way from 100 pc to << pc scales and form the precursor of a massive BH? Bottom line: in mergers there is no “star formation bottleneck”, at least down to 100 pc scales, and there is a lot of low angular momentum gas...

Friday, August 17, 12

Gas thermodynamics with effective equation of state (EOS) : polytropic with effective adiabatic index ~ 1.1-1.4 EOS based on model by Spaans & Silk 2005 (also Klessen et al. 2007) calibrated with radiative transfer calculation Accounts for thermal equilibrium between radiative cooling and heating (UV, IR from dust, cosmic rays) for density range 0.1 to 107 atoms/cc in dusty starburst with metal enriched gas (metallicity solar).

Shown box size = 200 pc on a side (galaxy cores a few Myr before final collision) 60% of total gas mass accumulated within 200 pc due to tidal torques and shocks

Gas-rich major mergers of massive proto-disk galaxies (Mdisk ~ 6 x 1010 Mo, 6 x 109 Mo of gas at merger time) in 1012 Mo halos at z ~8

Resolution 0.1 pc in ~ 30 kpc volume using SPH particle splitting with EOS appropriate for nuclear starburst (Spaans & Silk 2000, 2005) Galaxy halo mass consistent with abundance of high-z SDSS QSOs (Fan et al. 2006, Morlock et al. 2010) i.e. rare 3-4σ peaks at z > 6 (Volonteri & Rees 2006; Li et al.2007)

Friday, August 17, 12

Multi-stage gas inflow down to sub-pc in gravitationally unstable circumnuclear gas disk forming in major merger

• --> rapid formation of supermassive (> 108 Mo) sub-pc scale gas cloud

in only ~ 105 years after merger (SMBH precursor)

Mayer, Kazantzidis, Escala & Callegari, Nature, 2010 Below logrithmic density map spanning 105 yr after merger

Friday, August 17, 12

Multi-stage gas inflow down to sub-pc in gravitationally unstable circumnuclear gas disk forming in major merger

• --> rapid formation of supermassive (> 108 Mo) sub-pc scale gas cloud

in only ~ 105 years after merger (SMBH precursor)

Large scale m=2 mode imprinted by galaxy collision starts inflow in nuclear disk

Mayer, Kazantzidis, Escala & Callegari, Nature, 2010 Below logrithmic density map spanning 105 yr after merger

Friday, August 17, 12

Multi-stage gas inflow down to sub-pc in gravitationally unstable circumnuclear gas disk forming in major merger

• --> rapid formation of supermassive (> 108 Mo) sub-pc scale gas cloud

in only ~ 105 years after merger (SMBH precursor)

Secondary spiral instabililities assist inflow at < 10 pc scale and further increase central density Large scale m=2 mode imprinted by galaxy collision starts inflow in nuclear disk

Mayer, Kazantzidis, Escala & Callegari, Nature, 2010 Below logrithmic density map spanning 105 yr after merger

Friday, August 17, 12

Multi-stage gas inflow down to sub-pc in gravitationally unstable circumnuclear gas disk forming in major merger

• --> rapid formation of supermassive (> 108 Mo) sub-pc scale gas cloud

in only ~ 105 years after merger (SMBH precursor)

Secondary spiral instabililities assist inflow at < 10 pc scale and further increase central density Large scale m=2 mode imprinted by galaxy collision starts inflow in nuclear disk Central region then undergoes Jeans collapse formation of supermassive cloud (Nsph > 105)

Mayer, Kazantzidis, Escala & Callegari, Nature, 2010 Below logrithmic density map spanning 105 yr after merger

Friday, August 17, 12

• Supercloud Jeans unstable to resolution limit – further collapse (a) into supermassive star
• r (b) directly into > 108 Mo SMBH via post-newtonian instability (route (b) requires

R ~ 640GM/c2 ~ 0.02 pc for M ~ 108 Mo from numerical GR simulations results (Shibata et al. 2002; Saijo et al. 2009), for us Rcloud ~ 0.5 pc)

• Assuming route (a) and, conservatively, that >~ 105 Mo BH forms from ultimate

collapse of SMS ( < 0.1 % super-cloud mass!): If initial black hole forms at z ~ 9 then can grow at >~0.7 x Eddington rate to 109 Mo in < 3 x 108 yr, i.e before z ~ 7

In first 105 yr after merger: Mass inflow rate ~104-105 Mo/yr Star formation rate (~0.1 x Mg/Torb) ~ 103 Mo/yr

• - gas inflow up to 2 orders of

magnitude higher than star formation ratestar formation rate

initial After ~ 105 yr (Jeans unstable cloud arises at r < 1 pc)

Friday, August 17, 12

Base run 5x lower mass 40x lower mass (Mgal = 1012 Mo) (Mgal= 2 x 1011 Mo) (Mgal = 2.5 x 1010 Mo)

In low mass galaxies (~1010 Mo) no SMBH precursor forms

1:1 mergers between galaxies with a range of masses

Trot/W < 0.05 Trot/W > 0.25 bar unstable?

No Jeans unstable cloud because inflow is weakly self-gravitating

Shown on left: Logarithmic gas density maps

Friday, August 17, 12

We follow the cosmological evolution of galaxies and their black holes:

• PopIII seeds (M = 1000 Mo) populate ALL newly formed galaxies
• Direct collapse seeds (M= 105 Mo) are formed during major mergers

(and replace PopIII black holes), IF certain conditions implied by our simulations are satisfied

We use the semi-analytical Munich model of galaxy formation (Croton et al. 2006; Bonoli et al. 2009), applied to the outputs of the Millennium Simulation

We have a full population of galaxies evolving in a cosmological framework that allows us to seek the BH seed formation conditions from hydro simulations and statistically test our scenario

Embedding our formation scenario in the LCDM galaxy formation paradigm

(Bonoli, Mayer & Callegari 2012)

Friday, August 17, 12

Nuclear disc ~ 100 pc

Inflow of gas Feedback

Seed black hole of 105 Msun, starts accreting from large gas reservoir Self regulation: accretion stops once the feedback energy released by the black hole unbinds the reservoir (assumed

isotropic thermal feedback with 0.05 coupling efficiency). BH will continue grow Eddington limited during subsequent mergers in the same way as Pop III seeds (a la Croton et al. 2006) Radius of the reservoir is a free parameter (0.1-1pc), determines its binding energy

Conditions for the formation of massive seed black holes

✓1. Major merger (1:3) of gas-rich late-type galaxies (B/T < 0.2) ✓2. Host halo Mh > 1011MSun ✓3. No pre-existing black hole of MBH > 106 MSun

Friday, August 17, 12

How frequent is our direct collapse route as a function

• f redshift?
• Above z~4 all major mergers

could lead to direct collapse

• Major merger events

giving rise to direct collapse MBH seeds can happen even at low z (though large majority at z > 3)

Friday, August 17, 12

POP III DC 1 pc reservoir 0.1 pc reservoir

Properties of the mass function (data from Merloni & Heinz 2005)

Friday, August 17, 12

Clustering of galaxies forming direct collapse BHs at z < 0.1: two-point correlation function

Red : Hosts of Direct Collapse BH seeds formed at z < 0.1 Green: Recent major mergers which do not form BH seeds by direct collapse (but have Pop III seeds) and have same galaxy stellar mass distribution Blue: Random Sample with same stellar mass distribution

• f host galaxies

Low clustering amplitude relative to global BH population because host galaxies had few or no mergers for nearly an Hubble time (otherwise Pop III seed grows and prevents direct collapse), i.e. fairly isolated objects Qualitatively similar to low clustering of blue galaxies vs. global galaxy population (eg Li et al. 2006)

Friday, August 17, 12

• Does direct collapse into a SMBH really occur after formation of supermassive cloud and

Which path does it take? Global post-newtonian instability? Supermassive star + quasi-star?

• - Modeling of cloud collapse at even higher resolution w/post-newtonian effects and then

interface with full General Relativistic simulations

• - Better characterization of cloud physical state – beyond EOS w/radiative transfer, neutrino diffusion

in collapsing hot core etc..

• How does direct SMBH formation scenario depend on the structure/initial angular momentum content of

merging galaxies? What is the role of gas turbulence? Disks at high z clumpier and more turbulent than our ICs! Gravitoturbulence should aid collapse by extracing angular momentum further

• Does it stop working at low galaxy mass as our models with effective EOS suggest?

Likely yes --- in galaxies with M <~ 1010 Mo supernovae driven outflows should prevail over inflows, remove 2/3

• f baryons (Governato, Brook, Mayer et al. 2010; Brook et al. 2011)

Predictions (simulation combined with SAM):

• BH formed by merger-driven collapse also at low z, and should have low clustering amplitude(those that form at

high z are instead highly clustered as expected for high-sigma peaks)

• At z > 2 large deviations from the local Mbulge-MBH : SMBH already in place while galaxy/ bulge has nearly an Hubble

time let to grow

• If quasi-star phase precedes BH seed formation could be observable with JWST (blackbody emission at a few microns),

although only very few per JWST field expected (see also Volonteri & Begelman 2010). At low z such events about an

• rder of magnitude less frequent but gamma ray and radio emission could be detected if jets develop in quasi-stars,

perhaps explaining unidentified sources in gamma-ray catalogs (Czerny et al. 2012)

Open issues and implications

Friday, August 17, 12

From EOS model to model with explicit radiative cooling and star formation

Gas cools radiatively and turns into stars above a density of 104 cm-3 + pressurization

• f medium to avoid spurious fragmentation below local Jeans length

(no radiative transfer or heating by stellar/supernovae feedback, so max. fragmentation)

< 105 yr after the merger star formation has turned 30% of the nuclear gas disk into stars but > 108 Mo of gas still concentrates at < 0.5 pc in supermassive flattened cloud

•  even stronger inflow than with EOS model (gravitoturbulent regime,

see also Begelman & Shlosman 2010)

Friday, August 17, 12

From EOS model to model with explicit radiative cooling and star formation

Gas cools radiatively and turns into stars above a density of 104 cm-3 + pressurization

• f medium to avoid spurious fragmentation below local Jeans length

(no radiative transfer or heating by stellar/supernovae feedback, so max. fragmentation)

< 105 yr after the merger star formation has turned 30% of the nuclear gas disk into stars but > 108 Mo of gas still concentrates at < 0.5 pc in supermassive flattened cloud

•  even stronger inflow than with EOS model (gravitoturbulent regime,

see also Begelman & Shlosman 2010)

Friday, August 17, 12

POP III (small seeds) DC

• ther colors

for other percentiles

Features of merger histories for galaxy hosts of different BH seeds

Only clear distinction between seeding scenarios: hosts of direct collapse seeds have first major merger earliest

Friday, August 17, 12

A binary SMBH stalls at ~ 0.5 pc in a nuclear disk capable

• f forming a central massive supercloud

Dynamical friction from bacground gas in supersonic regime scales as ρ/vbh2, where ρ is the local gas density and vbh the velocity of the black holes relative to the gas Both SPH (Mayer et al. 2007) and AMR simulations (Chapon, Mayer & Teyssier 2011) show that binary of SMBH hardens down to about ~ 1 pc separation in ~ 106 yr. But in less than 105 yr (1) density increases by x10 (the supercloud) at scales < 1 pc

• ver ~105 years but decreases x10 just outside 0.5 pc +(2) vbh increases because

larger mass in the center (=supercloud)

• -- df slows inefficient because tinflow < tdf

Friday, August 17, 12

A binary SMBH stalls at ~ 0.5 pc in a nuclear disk capable

• f forming a central supercloud

But is a nuclear gas disk with a central supercloud a realistic configuration when two SMBHs are already present?

Friday, August 17, 12

The answer is: probably not

Attractive scenario (to be investgated);

• when no pre-existing black hole is present disk is

violently unstable, drives a strong inflow and central supercloud collapse -- massive SMBH seed formation in massive merging protogalaxies at z > 5

(ii) when one or two massive black holes are already in place

in the nuclear disk (MBH >= 106 Mo) they accrete gas and heat the disk via radiative feedback, stabilizing it against spiral instabilities and thus suppressing the central collapse

(Q > 2 from Eddington limit accretion and 10% of accretion energy released as thermal/turbulent kinetic energy over about 108 yr)

the disk profile does not become so steep and the binary can sink down to separations < 0.1 pc. Binary SMBH coalescence successful + no formation of new SMBH seed

Friday, August 17, 12

Which fate of the “supercloud”?

New ongoing simulation campaign to study supercloud collapse to post-netwonian regime (Mayer, in prep.) First step; verification that cloud collapses continues below 0.1 pc in the newtonian case, including superclouds with highest angular momentum, by repe- ating simulations with 0.02 pc resolution (at even higher res PN corrections necessary) Cloud evolved with γ = 1.1 and γ = 4/3 (likely more realistic, should be optically thick to its own radiation radiation pressure supported cloud) After 2 free-fall times γ=4/3 cloud in sim with highest Trot/W (> ~0.25) has turned into a core-disk envelope structure (no bar instability occurs) Core contains ~ 7 x 107 Mo, is ~ 0.04 pc in size and is still Jeans unstable at t=2tff (end of sim)

3 pc box 0.05 pc box

Friday, August 17, 12